[fyrfytrhoges]

just thought I'd start a thread of it's own to get feedback on what everyone thinks of the cd.

I have to say that I just cannot get over the brightness of the sony ns500v, I had read that the sacd playback was supposed to be far superior to the redbook playback but I don't find that the case. however the multichannel is just awesome, just place yourself in the sweetspot and close your eyes, preferably in a dark room with no distractions.

I wish they would just get it over already and release the rest of pink floyd's stuff on sacd!

 

[fyrfytrhoges]

Since no one else seems interested I'll post a few more remarks. After further review (I listened to the multi channel mix again) I have to give the new dsotm a thumbs down. It just seems to me like there is too much going on in that center channel. I understand that at a live performance the lead singer is usually center stage with the other musicians surrounding him or her, but to me the center channel on this recording is just way to busy. Am I missing something? There are a few tracks that work, "Time, and "Brain Damage" seem to work, but for the rest lets just say I'll stick with my nad and my 1992 pink floyd remasters, also I just can't get over the brightness of the ns500v, I was really hoping that the sacd playback was superior to the redbook, but to my ears it's not. Hopefully at the chicago meet I'll get to hear some higher quality sacd players and that will change my mind, but for now, I'm on the fence on this whole sacd thing!

 

[bundee1]

I think the best tracks are MONEY and US AND THEM. MONEY sounds great turned up because you can hear all the individual effects and instruments, while at the same time they all come together and propel the track. Its such a pleasure to listen to TURNED UP LOUD!

 

[fyrfytrhoges]

what the hell! you mean there are only two people on this forum who bought this album, or are you guys just too busy listening to it to give an opinion, cmon guys!

 

[dariusf]

I did buy it but I still need SACD player for it

See you at the Chicago meet! Can't wait for both

 

[dngl]

i haven't heard the surround mix, but the sacd stereo layer is ace! definitely better than my 1992 remaster. time is one of my fave pink floyd tracks and it has never sounded better. an exceptionally clean and good master, easy to hear all the instruments, hooray.

 

[MusicJunkie]

I have it and I've listened to the 2 channel sacd and the redbook mix. To my ears it sounds bass heavy, even through my ER4Ps. Anyone else feel that way? Other than that it is stellar.

MJ

 

[nebuchadnezzar]

Who needs Multi-Channel!?!?

I just listened to the Stereo Mix...(as I don't have a Multi-Channel machine) It sounds great. Incredible soundstaging and fantastic depth. Everything sounds right ...

This had always been one of my favorite albums, and it just got better. As I listened to this re-master, I was taken back to the first time I heard it...sitting on the carpet in front of my cousin's system, thumbing through her vinyl, the cover art struck me. I said: 'hey, what's this?' Her response was: 'you never heard Pink Floyd?!!?' I was absolutely amazed then......I'm amazed all over again.


I had been thinking about buying a 999es to replace my 9000, now I have a damn good excuse to spend the money! Gotta hear the Surround Mix.

 

[Ebonyks]

I've got to say that the stereo mix is so-so, time being undoubtly the weakest track in my mind for imaging, the bass guitar is placed so far off of the stage, it's just strange. The stereo track was clearly designed for speakers, and not for headphones. I'm letting my melos warm up, so those are only my inital impressions, i'll be back in a few hours with more.

Also, vocals seemed unsually thin, but i attribute that to the tubes being cold than anything else

Edit: also, the bass does seem a bit over-impactful. Nick mason's drumming has never sounded more detailed though, with near-perfect decay

 

[JMedeiros]

I'm digging the surround mix right now. been awhile since I had the speakers up this loud.

I'm hearing little voices and sounds from places in the room where I don't even have speakers.

John

 

[JMedeiros]

Quote:

Originally posted by Ebonyks also, the bass does seem a bit over-impactful. Nick mason's drumming has never sounded more detailed though, with near-perfect decay

agreed...I had to rush over and turn my sub down.

 

[fyrfytrhoges]

Jon, your sacd source must be heads above mine because the ns500v only brings out the brightness, it's like fingers across a chalkboard to me, I just can't get past it. maybe I'll try it with the nad and see how the redbook remaster sounds, hard to believe it could out do the 92.

 

[Ebonyks]

Alright, i've got some more updated impressions...

First of all, even with the tubes warmed up, the thiness in some of the vocals still exists, most notably in breathe. The imaging in some songs, especially time, remains pretty bad, Roger sounds like he's playing from off-stage.

Overall, the remasters are good, the SACD is superior to the 92 remasters, but it's still far from perfect, and i still believe that a better remaster could be constructed.

Perhaps i need to mix this myself, and finally get it right...

 

[AdamP88]

I love both the surround and stereo mixes. It's interesting that you say the center channel is too busy, because for me it feels like this cd makes MUCH better use out of the center channel than other sacds I've heard. I think it's a more imaginative use, and really adds to the sense of spaciousness in the surround mix, rather than just keeping the vocals locked in the center. I particularly like how the vocals are left to the fronts for the most part, so they sound a bit more forward in the soundstage, rather than tied directly to the center channel. I was also quite startled by how deep the bass is on both mixes, though - it's nice to finally have a quality sub to handle it, too. Another thing, even on the stereo mix, some of the speaking voices sound startlingly holographic in their imaging, and when listening to headphones (casually while browsing the net) I actually caught myself turning my head to see who was talking to me.

Finally, I have to echo a few others here: This cd sounds damn good turned up loud.

 

[fyrfytrhoges]

that's it, 8 people out there bought this album, or should I say there's only eight people out there who have an opinion about it, geez, usually you don't have to pull teeth to get people to give their opinions around here, they usually flow like a tidal wave. Maybe I should have put this in the take it outside section, then there would be some controversy!